Mapping routes for XC passes on Open Street Maps?

[erutan]

I agree on the general "if you build it they will come" take. Wonderland of Rocks is my favorite area in JTree for wandering (we hauled in 30lbs of water January to stage dayhikes) and it's interesting seeing areas with heavy climber use access trails and other spots with no sign of human habitation. Interesting to think of the Boy Scout trail being single track. Most of the roadside attraction rock pile stuff in JTree is terribly braided, but the northern area by the main roads are ecologically a tiny fraction of the park (if the most aesthetically interesting) - I guess that's the tradeoff between access and preservation the NPS came up with there.

With traffic in the Sierra, this is route-itis thread I came across searching for the KCHBR is the biggest thing I'm worried about, given that the majority of XC hikers are doing some acronym or another, though even that's usually a couple a day compared to the hundreds on the JMPCT north/south loop. A while back elsewhere I came up with the following when talking about the YHR:

"Last summer I did a Lamarck Col > Davis Lakes > Valor Col > Finger Col > Black Giant Pass > Bishop Pass trip - I wrote up some passes on HST, did conditions reports on HST & FB current conditions group (no $25 charge lol), but didn't try to make it anything other than a random hike I decided to do and didn't share details of it beyond the cruxes that people could use to make their own hikes. Heck my Kearsarge > Vidette > Junction Pass > Wright Basin > Wales/Wallace Basin > Williamson Bowl > Shepherd's pass could be called 'the 4Ws' or something. Rush Creek > North Glacier Pass > Vernon Pass > Slug Pass > Happy Isles could be the 'headwaters route'. There' hundreds viable 'high routes' in the range."

I liked 9h13no3's take - putting up a trail where there's an existing use trail to further reduce impacts makes sense to me, though when something connects to a frontcountry trailhead there's some percentage of day hikers that will go on it because it's there, and that leads to even more erosion, trash, and people wandering around. I wonder how many people continue on into horse creek from twin lakes because of the OSM trail? I feel like the vast majority of ones with worn paths deep in the backcountry are climbers approach routes or SHR passes that will get traffic anyways. Part of the reason I just contribute to passes vs large trip reports is so a ton of people don't see photos of miter basin or whatever and crowd on in.

Gaia seems to have taken account some of the feedback here (or people just put things at SAC 4) https://www.reddit.com/r/GaiaGPS/commen ... cal_andor/ and Caltopo has already been doing this, so there's at least some visual styling of trails that have lower visibility or more technical requirements, though I wouldn't mind seeing more of them locked behind a "mountaineers routes" layer or something on Gaia.

On the plus side back when I'd build out routes on Caltopo to post with exit dates when I was backpacking on long solo xc trips without a PLB I found being able to have the route trace over a xc pass saved me some time.

[creekfeet]

But we older backpackers who feel this way are a dying breed. Most younger backpackers want GPS tracks.

I think this is an overgeneralization. Addiction/reliance on electronic devices is always associated with young people, but a quick survey of any public space shows that technology addiction knows no age distinction. I’m a young-ish backpacker that’s done all my treks in the age of GPS, and would never dream of heading out into the backcountry with anything more sophisticated than a 7.5 minute map. I know plenty of other young backpackers in the same boat.

Another gripe of mine is putting up a GPS track route, naming it some cleaver catchy name and then "selling" it on the internet.

In complete agreement here. The proliferation of acronym routes drives me crazy. Half the joy of backpacking is spending the winter pouring over maps and planning a route, only to completely disregard it once you’re out in the wild and get intrigued by something. I don’t see the point in following someone else’s route, and not having the flexibility to change plans.

But that being said, there’s probably room for some collective introspection here. I’d venture to guess “Pickett Lake'' visitation, for instance, has increased about a hundredfold since the creation of this site. From John Muir and Theodore Solomons to Wilbur McClure and Colonel John White, loving the Sierra and the solitude it provides while simultaneously promoting the hell out of it is nothing new, and most of us do the same thing. (Granted those guys were generally doing so in the name of raising awareness to grant more stringent protections.)

And to the main point, I feel that given the recent proliferation of wildfires, and the increased popularity of backpacking in the Instagram age, it makes sense to add more trails, or rather bring back some of the old historic ones (Black Oak, Paradise-Atwell, Cartridge Pass, etc.) We’re going on close to 80 years since any new trails were built in SEKI, so it might be time. Also for routes with extremely well-defined social trails and clear environmental degradation (Silliman Lake comes to mind) it makes sense to saw a few logs, construct a water bar or two, and just make an official trail. Same for Copper Mine Pass, given that it’s frequently used, but everyone struggles to find, let alone agree, where the actual pass is.

[SSSdave]

@erutan >>> I'm personally of the feeling that uploading gpx files for xc passes is a bad thing overall for a few reasons:..

Agreed. Worse are those trying to make money showing exact GPX locations for otherwise unknown remote landscape photo perspectives. Many years ago predicted this would all come to pass.

@erutan >>>Part of the reason I just contribute to passes vs large trip reports is so a ton of people don't see photos of miter basin or whatever and crowd on in.

Many images will allow someone with strong topo skills to figure out where they were taken, but IMO 98% of others that would otherwise just be able to follow GPS tracks will not have a clue. And those few that can are not likely to tend to publicly share that information. In 2019 when I went over Shepherd Pass for 10 days into the Upper Kern, I had an elaborate detailed plan for capturing unique landscapes that was very successful. I've shared images of the trip publicly via my website. However beyond the pass provided no route or campsite information with images purposely out of sequence:

https://www.davidsenesac.com/2019_Trip_ ... 019-7.html

Although I'd expect several on this board could figure out where several shots were made, again they are not the people likely to worry about spreading information to armchair backpackers. We live in a technology and communication knee of human history. Lucky are we explorers now versus what will likely await those in a couple centuries.



crop from above 10100x4000 pixel full image:

[erutan]

re: ageism and technology, most of the people that pore over google earth satellite imagery are a generation older than me. I do like having GPS & Topo (mark waypoints of camps, notes on water or cool spots, to help optimize navigation when solo xc) but could do without it. Coming up with random loops and in field improvising is a big part of the charm of the Sierra for me - and something I realized when I traveled to some other ranges that were more spectacular in some ways, but had non class 4/5 terrain that was overgrown or swampy, no dispersed camping etc. The ease of wandering while being in a really rugged alpine environment is truly unique.

SSSdave that area is looking a lot greener than when I've been there, early summer? I appreciate there's ways to trip reports and photos while keeping things quiet (the unnamed lake fishing reports fall into that). Another part of it is that I like going blind into areas aside from topo so don't likewise want to spoil the fun for others - I used to share more complete albums of trips up until 17 or so, from then I just shared photos that are conditions related publicly.

I have basic OSM editing skills (I've fixed some trails in the SW that were really off) but am hesitant to just delete tracks that someone publicly contributed. For things that clearly have no trail like the non-chute part of little Joe pass I feel like it'd be a pretty clear net positive thing to do. It'd make route planning in caltopo with snap to trail a bit harder, but that's a minor inconvenience.

I figure I'd try and find some community consensus before removing someone's well intentioned contribution to the public domain.

[Enigmagic]

@enigmagic any thoughts? You're heavily into OSM and we've chatted about things before.

Many of the issues with mapping unofficial/unmaintained trails on OSM have been getting more visibility recently, https://www.openstreetmap.us/2021/12/os ... king-group being the best supported forum for addressing these.

Personally? yeah, I've spent quite a bit of time placing XC passes, which now show up in Caltopo (hooray!), but don't have much interest in mapping XC routes over them... for the obvious reasons you pointed out already. I'm also sure some unofficially named passes are missing still. I will try to improve heavily trafficked use trails like Lamarck, official but poorly maintained trails like Langley (this is an official trail now btw), and old/unmaintained but still usable trails on historic USGS or USFS maps, and yes even the occasional XC pass like Little Joes. iirc I fixed the name and the chute. I hope this is helpful for those of us wandering off the popular routes.

Where the old quads aren't accurate and I don't have tracks, or the trails are overgrown the the point of being lost I don't bother mapping... Cataract/Cartridge Creek/Tunemah fall in this camp, along with plenty of others. Trails that still exist in part but aren't very useful (original Taboose trail, Whitney Pass, Jigsaw, Black Lake, Goat Mountain/Lower Paradise, ..) I don't map either, they receive almost no traffic and are are either obvious or slower than the alternatives.

I spend a lot more time improving the lesser traveled, and less controversial, official trails throughout the Sierra. at this time the OSM trails (specifically) are much more accurate than the USGS, NPS and USFS maps. typically aligned within a few feet, including switchbacks. overkill? yes. necessary? absolutely not. useful? maybe. just maybe. guaranteed, or your money back

[frozenintime]

there was an official trail to tunemah lake at some point?

[Enigmagic]

there was an official trail to tunemah lake at some point?

might not have been the best example but Tunemah Pass (not the lake) had a trail in old maps

[Wandering Daisy]

In spite of all the discussion above, last year I saw very few people, except on "named" routes (Circle of Solitude), day-hiking distance of trailheads, and "named" trails (JMT/PCT). I think permit quotas are working as well as most backpacker's preference for named routes. I went several days on each of many trips without seeing anybody. A bit of nasty weather and fear of smoke also helped drive out the hesitant. The most people I encounter were trail crews and I do appreciate their hard work! Perhaps part of my solitude was because I did not get permits for trailheads of my first choice, some that are starting points for "named" routes. I am not sure if my solitude is just luck, or if perhaps the fear of all the internet information is a bit overblown. In the last 5 years or so, I really have not seen more crowding that I would normally expect.

As for trails, once built they have to be maintained. That takes a lot of money for the national parks and forests. I think they are being pinched so much now that even major trails are on a long waiting list. The PCT organization does a lot of volunteer trail maintenance, which helps. I am not in favor of making official trails out of use-trails because it amounts to a commitment that likely cannot be maintained.

[erutan]

I rarely see people XC unless they're on an acronym route - I'm not overly concerned about drawing more people to XC once more than ~5 miles out from a trailhead because they see a "trail" on their digital map of choice (though I do think there's some risk in people not digging into metadata and assuming an actual trail exists, though they can always just backtrack), I'm just trying to get a feel for community norms here as someone who has edited OSM a handful of times.

I've personally fixed some misnamed lakes & add named XC passes in the Sierra Nevada (one yesterday!) and added meta-data and corrected some trails in the SW. There are times where I'll come across something that I wonder about - there was an OSM route for the east side of north glacier pass that was off-route I brought up a bit ago viewtopic.php?f=31&t=8580#p167700 - for that would it be best to lop it off where it gets off-route, remove it entirely even though it's a solid trail on the bottom, or try and have it continue approximately?

Thanks for jumping in @Enigmagic - I do remember you working on Little Joe Pass from the xc pass forum a while ago. What would your feelings be for just keeping the chute mapped and dropping the (from what I remember very much CYOA) route up to it from the lake? I don't think its likely to get over used it just came up as a useful example of what came to mind. A few times in the SW I'd label some ******** non-existent route from "Red Top Mountain Trail" to "Red Top Mountain Climber Access (approx)" which felt more appropriate - I assume adding the Scramble at the end of Little Joe was meant to do that, but amusingly enough someone is now referring to the route as Little Joe Scramble.

Would it be worth explicitly labeling abandoned and informal trails? Like "Ram Lakes Basin (abandoned)" or "Little Joe Pass (unofficial)" for clarity?

I checked out the link you sent - it seems like the content/discussion is centered around a slack channel? Hopefully it's not too general use / high traffic and things are getting archived.

Agreed that mapping abandoned trails that still exist and are useful makes sense - the one up to Sky Blue comes to mind. Wallace Canyon is still technically maintained, but I've never been able to follow it all the way up, it comes and goes a lot. I'm honestly a bit torn between trying to keep boots on stuff like that to help "maintain" it vs just staying off it and letting it be reclaimed by wilderness. The old trail from Purple Lake to Ram Lakes Basin is fairly solid - keeping that but not making a route just because you drop down to Virginia Lake from the pass SE of Glentte Lake. Though I guess that could be worth writing up in the xc pass forum as an unofficial pass (Glenette Pass?) and adding the pass name on OSM I suppose. Perhaps a new thread on making more named passes if they're relatively obvious and easy is warranted. I don't think every walkable route needs to be named and documented as much as I think it's a worthy cause overall.

Lamarck is an official trail now as well as Langley - trail work on it was just delayed due to COVID. It'll be interesting to see how they handle the top couple hundred feet of the pass. I assume it'll be something like Dana & Bubb Lake where it gets maintenance but isn't advertised (unless the latter has changed) - I don't think the agencies are really interested in taking them on, but are doing so because of traffic and erosion issues. Dragon Lake trail is abandoned despite being in great shape for 98% of it - it's a little more of an interesting aside and boots can maintain it, whereas if they don't do something about Langley & Lamarck it'll just end up spiderwebbing more and more.

This thread has been really useful to me to help give me a feeling of what the norms and best practices are!

[Wandering Daisy]

Whether to concentrate use by making and maintaining trails (concentrate impact) vs. "reclaiming" use-trails (disperse impact) is a classic question. I vaguely recall we had a post about this in the past.

I really would hate to see any policy that would lead to requiring travel on trails and designated established campsites, as is done in many other countries. Concentrating use can lead to a slippery slope of over-regulation. Some of the more popular trails in British Columbia have these requirements, however I think they are largely driven by wildlife/safety issues due to a large grizzly bear population.

My husband had an interesting comment that after we raise a generation of kids glued to their computer games, and when virtual reality becomes highly developed, perhaps some will prefer that to actually going out in the wilderness. Perhaps they will be able to find "named routes" on the internet, and then buy fancy virtual reality versions. Now that is another way to monetize "named routes" with zero impact!